On Friday 31 August 2001 10:47, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2001 at 10:38:39AM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > On Friday 31 August 2001 10:31, Charles Randall wrote:
> > > From: Justin Erenkrantz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > >
> > > >FWIW, we should not remove the config.nice files or certain generated
> > > >files (exports.c seems to come to mind) under any circumstances. We
> > > >also don't remove build.mk because it is like a Makefile (which we
> > > >don't seem to remove).
> > >
> > > Hmm. Am I the only one who assumes that "make distclean" is supposed to
> > > return the directory structure to the state of distribution?
> > >
> > > Does anyone else have thoughts on this?
> >
> > Make distclean should definately clean to a distribution state. If it
> > doesn't, then it is broken. Make clean should be used to clean
> > everything except the types of files mentioned above.
>
> I think the point is that there are some files that can be generated
> that shouldn't be cleaned. We don't want to remove config.nice for
> sure and we probably don't want to remove exports.c as it never
> changes. As gstein has pointed out, exports.c should be created by
> the roll script because it is only dependent on the .c files in the
> tree.
>
> All of that said, I am sure that there are some files that we do
> need to clean up that we aren't doing now. -- justin
exports.c shouldn't be cleaned, correct, because it is a part of the
distribution, or at least it should be if it isn't already. config.nice is
not a part of the distribution however, and should be removed by
make distclean.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------
